If health care is such a large market ready to be disrupted by technology , where are the winners? Why are the few wins we can point to incremental rather than transformative?
Venture investors shy away from strategies with a 20 percent chance of being transformative and an 80 percent chance of being a zero. Why? Investors don't have a healthy relationship with risk and want to see predictable progress. This is why investors love software-as-a-service or SaaS business — they're understood and repeatable.
Health systems also have change-averse cultures with complex internal relationships. There are discrepancies between the desires of primary care physicians and those employed in specialty care. There are discrepancies between the priorities of the health informaticians and the providers. Administrators prioritize different things than both providers and informatics folks. Buy-in and adoption require all these parties.
. Why? Among other things, it was difficult to get SNF's to participate despite payers benefitting from the cost savings.Even when companies have gotten distribution through payers they have struggled with customer utilization. Teladoc markets itsas 4 times the industry standard. Imagine Slack marketing that 8 percent of their customer's employees used the product!
First off, digital is NOT low cost! Adds hundreds of dollars per year per software license for maintenance and upgrades and licensing. Plus it’s hard too see in most formats, causing errors. Not a screen size issue - it’s about screen design and medical logic formatting.